Skip to main content

Security report for yelp.ca

Yelp · Technology · Canada

Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in GDPR outside view.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Yelp is a well-established online platform specializing in local business reviews and recommendations, serving consumers seeking trusted information about restaurants, services, and entertainment. The website demonstrates a high level of professionalism with excellent content quality, clear navigation, and a strong brand presence. Technically, Yelp employs modern web technologies including React and ES modules, supported by a robust CDN infrastructure. However, a critical security gap exists due to the absence of a valid SSL/TLS certificate, which undermines user trust and data security. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms are comprehensive but GDPR compliance is not fully indicated. Overall, Yelp maintains a strong market position with enterprise-level scale and consistent domain registration practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching yelp.ca

This scan found 12 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
90
Security headers
75
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
76

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Yelp operates as a leading technology company in the local business review sector, monetizing through advertising and business services. Its target audience includes consumers and business owners. The company benefits from a mature domain age and strong domain protection, reinforcing its legitimacy. The platform integrates with multiple partner domains for business services and support, enhancing its ecosystem. Yelp's business model leverages user-generated content and data analytics to provide value to advertisers and consumers alike.

Security posture

The current security posture is weakened by the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing users to potential risks. Security headers such as HSTS, CSP, and X-Frame-Options are properly implemented, indicating adherence to best practices. No immediate vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies are not explicitly found, suggesting areas for improvement in transparency and readiness. The absence of contact channels for security incidents limits responsiveness.

Recommendations

  1. Urgently deploy and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and protect user data.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or higher) and implement OCSP stapling and session resumption for improved security and performance.
  3. Publish clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies, including dedicated security contact channels.
  4. Enhance GDPR compliance indicators and data protection officer contact information to strengthen privacy posture.
  5. Continue to monitor and update security headers and conduct regular security audits to maintain best practices.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
MarkMonitor International Canada Ltd.
Technical notes

Notes

Yelp's infrastructure is built on a modern React-based frontend with extensive use of ES modules and third-party libraries such as Lottie-web and Immutable.js. The site is hosted likely on AWS with CDN support from yelpcdn.com, ensuring global content delivery. Performance metrics are not available, but mobile optimization and accessibility features are well implemented. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags, Open Graph data, and structured JSON-LD schema. Technical debt appears low, but the critical SSL issue represents a significant risk to operational security and user trust.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with yelp.ca. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review yelp.ca.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.